@Jochen; what setup would you use then to get a smoke column (from mask) without its surroundings? And Oshyan is right, that's what would be quite useful, so you could have distant fires not by making complicated cloud stuff, but just inserting some cards (distant anyway). Preferably even a generic cloud column that could be warped procedurally in world scale to get different shapes.

I'd use the setup shown in my example on page 3.Image map shader set to object's UVas mask for a surface layer and the glass shader connected to the input of the surf layer.Using the create transparency feature of the image map shader would be even better,but I couldn't get it to work.

QuoteBut what you want isn't really glass or how "glass" works in the real world. You're just using the glass shader as a way around the translucency limitation. So what you really want is real non-binary translucency support, correct?

QuoteA......I used the default shader (most probably like Ulco) to use the opacity feature to get completely rid of the haze parts.

As far as I can say this is doing the same thing twice and thus unnecessary.Put another way: why simple,when you can do it complicated. But I thought there might be another reason I'm just too stupid to see.

The problem is you get a different look with nearly every different combination.It doesn't look so that it should when you look at the node tree but the renders are different.And the renders who look the same are not the ones you want.

So i tried many different combinations. I was going to show some renders and node setups with your setup,mine and Ulco's and some between but there are so many that i gave up to post them here

Nobody responded to my rant on page 2 but i stay by it. I want a supersurface node with opacity,transparency,reflectivity etc.Why should it so hard to mask a surface or use opacity,transparency etc. on a surface?

Nobody responded to my rant on page 2 but i stay by it. I want a supersurface node with opacity,transparency,reflectivity etc.Why should it so hard to mask a surface or use opacity,transparency etc. on a surface?

Heh heh, likely because we've all let loose with that rant and are waiting patiently for the Surface shader to come of age...heh.

something borrowed,something Blue.Ring out the Old.Bring in the NewBobby Stahr, Paracosmologist

I don't think we need to rant (I know you didn't mean it that harsh), but ask Matt (and Jo) nicely if something like we need would be possible. I understand it's difficult enough to build software like this and I have great respect, the more since it's getting more complicated with every new feature. And if I see what difficulty I had a few years back getting things together (like a whole city, house by house, exactly nexto to eachother with only box view!), we've gone a huge way.

Didn't respond to your "rant",because I for one don't like the all in one idea,but that'sjust me.

Still interested in the haze thing?Since I never had seen that in my tests with propblur and the like I tried to recreateUlco's atmo and light settings etc and used one of my test objects instead.After allKadri said he had seen the haze effect with "my" setup and others,too.So I did,but no haze,no matter what settings were used.Gisd on or off -> no haze.Defer atmo or whatever -> no haze.After several more tests with my file and Ulco'slatest file it dawned on me finally.At least I hope so. I couldn't get no haze,because there is no haze.Had looked for the main portion of the discs to become hazy as in the examples in this thread.That didn't happen.The haze effect is merely an optical illusion that fools our eyes.What happens is the AO effect of the Gisd is blocked behind the transparent object,simply not rendered and that looks like the object becomes hazy/foggy under certainconditions.Especially when there are lots of details behind it like in Ulco's example.In my test file there is just a thin line at the bottom of the wall and thus the discstays clear.Took quite some time to notice and realize that.[attach=1]Have a look yourself.Maybe I'm wrong again.

That is what i sometimes don't understand. You don't like that features should be easier to use?The separate nodes could be still around for hardcore users. Why don't you like a node where all the standard things for a surface are in one node united?Curious.

QuoteYou haven't read some of the posts from page 4 probably. Yes it is the GISD.

I had read Matt's post,but it got me thinking in the wrong direction.You should have notcied by now that I can't even count to two sometimes. My point is that Gisd doesn't make it hazy,it just don't get rendered behindtransparent objects,that's all.Sorry for being dumb.

QuoteThat is what i sometimes don't understand. You don't like that features should be easier to use?The separate nodes could be still around for hardcore users.Why don't you like a node where all the standard things for a surface are in one node united?Curious.

To me it doesn't make things easier necessarily.Look at the default shader for example.It shares some features with the reflective shader and the image map shader,but thereare differences.And those force me to use the other shaders in conjunction often.On the other hand I have to admit that some features of the default shader are missingin the reflective shader and I would like to have them there also.Image slots mainly.The other thing is that I think it's more versatile to set things up the way I want.At least I imagine that.But I know that's just me and the majority likes to have all in one for everything.Shaders,whole applications or whatever.So usually I keep my mouth shut and try to make the best out of the given.Hope that explains a wee bit.